Re: Indy (beta?)

[Moi <jfm2@club-internet.fr>]

   On Sat, 18 Mar 2000, Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
   >
   > > Are we shooting for a beta release of Indy on this round
(6.2beta??)??
   > 
   > I'd hope so (-; We really want to be on CD. It's psychologically
bad for
   > us not to be. Speaking for myself, it's the main reason I slacked
off. We
   > need to get *something* on CD.
   >
   I have already contacted the good folks at Cheapbytes.com and they
have
   said that they would make the CD and sell it from their site. All we
   need to do is supply the ISO.
   >  
   > > 1) XFree86-4.0 has been released and I downloaded and compiled
from
   > > source before the binaries were released and have been running it
ever
   > > since with no major problems. Do we want to include it? No other
distro
   > > has yet. We would be first.
   > 
   > Does it work with all cards ? This is one problem. Another issue is
that
   > it is *difficult* to configure, because Redhat's XConfigurator
doesn't
   > work with it yet ( unless someone can hack at it ).
   >
   No it dose not. But it should soon. Yea, It is a little tarse, but I
   managed with XFree86 -configure. The hack is a thought, but I think
the
   XFree team is working on a better one.

But it really flies and thus we should go for it.  Problem is the
configurator.  Two solutions: either we fix Xconfigurator or we keep
building the distro in other areas waiting for the momnet the big guys
will release their configurator.


   > 
   > > 2) Daily RPM builds for the KDE 2 alpha have been released and
the KDE 2
   > > code base has been frozen. 
   > 
   > I believe the APIs are frozen.
   > 
   > > Only bug fixes allowed at this point. Most
   > > reports a have read are fairly good. 
   > 
   > I find it usable but there are some stupid bugs at least with the
one I'm
   > using. For example, the logout button doesn't work. 
   >
   There are RPM's and hacks built by a member of the KDE team that have
   corrected some/most of these problems. I believe Kmail is still
unstable
   and loosing mail. But the older 1.x version can be used in place of
it.
   > 
   > > 3) Add Donovan's fonts, Indialer and the Tips we have been
talking about.
   > > (Plus anything else I may have missed).
   > 
   > Those Microsoft fonts are really good. ( as opposed to my ones
which are 
   > basically cheap adobe knockoffs ) 
   > 
   > We should, IMO, investigate the
   > possibility of adding the gratis MS fonts. if we can't do this, we
should
   > write a little program that downloads and installs them. ( I could
do this
   > ).

Basically either we copy MS fonts to a Linux dir a t install time or
we force the mounting of the DOS partition at boot time ( a bit
dangerous) and then we add the MS directory to the Font server config
path.




   > 
   > THere are some other nice tweaks we could include , such as
tweaking the
   > ghostscript Fontmap so that it automatically works with the MS font
   > collection.
   >
   I'll take your word for it. I don't know much about fonts.

   > BTW, I am trying to learn C and python to make myself more useful
(-;
   > 
   Great!

   The above reasons are all good reasons to state "Beta" in the
release.
   It may not work for everyone. But it will get us out the door and on
CD
   and generate bug reports to help with the final release later.

   Also, we will be the first to release these new packages in a distro
and
   claim some attention. Even if not all is perfect. It will probably
work
   for most and be "bleeding edge".

   I think my points are valid because we need a release, even a BETA
   release! I think it will help.

YES.


-- 
			Jean Francois Martinez

Project Independence:  Linux for the masses